To peaceful Muslims, to let the people of Taif remain pagans would be like saying the Nazi party and its leaders should have been allowed to go free and be allowed to remain Nazis after WWII. It wasn't paganism, but the type of paganism they were following that was the problem. Just as it isn't monotheism, but the type of monotheism ISIS practices that is the problem
Why do you say Muhammad started hostilities? I thought it was Mecca pagans who started hostilities.
Let's get some of the facts straight.
I don't think either of you (sovietchild and J2hapydna) understand that hostilities and aggression and actual of war don't necessarily have to mean exactly the things.
FIRST. Between 610 - 622, Muhammad was living in Mecca when he began preaching his new religion in public.
Both of you (sovietchild and J2hapydna) believe that Muhammad was peaceful.
It may seem that way, but that's not really the case.
When Muhammad began preaching, some people followed him, while others mocked him, mainly because they didn't take him seriously. This act of "mocking", is not an "act of war". Were the Meccans "petty", yes. Act of war, no.
And the "mocking" is not persecution, because they didn't threaten Muhammad, nor did they attempt to stop Muhammad from preaching, because they didn't find Muhammad "threatening" them. Muhammad was "harmless" at this stage, in this early stage of his religion infancy.
Do you both agree with my assessment of this situation that I have described so far?
But when later Muhammad began preaching to his followers that Muslims must begin to destroy the idols of this city (Mecca), especially the official idols at Kaaba, the pagan Meccans began to take him seriously.
I don't know in what year, when Muhammad's preaching changed from peaceful one to threatening one, but I t is HERE, that Muhammad started the trouble with his preaching, because he was inciting his followers to destroy their current way of life.
Neither Christians, nor Jews that lived in any Arabian city or town, or just go to them to trade, did not threaten the pagans' way of life. They live and trade together, without threatening each other's religions.
But Muhammad did, when he began preaching that the idols must be destroyed.
At this point, the pagan Meccans wanted him to stop threatening to their way of life. Apparently Muhammad didn't stop, because it eventually escalated to Muslim persecution. And by the time Muhammad left Mecca with his family, friends and followers in 622, with one Muslim dead.
Muhammad clearly felt fear for his own life, so they left Mecca.
The preaching of destroying idols by Muhammad, the persecution of Muslims, the death of one Muslim, and Muhammad's self exile: none of these, are "act of war".
There was no war, at this stage.
SECOND. Before Muhammad led his people to their final destination, and eventual home in Medina, which was their place of refuge, they first sought refuge in Ta'if, in 622.
Ta'if was a pagan city, so they must have heard the reason why Muhammad was seeking refuge with them. They must have felt that Muslims might also threaten their pagan religion, so they rejected Muhammad's supplication. They didn't threaten Muhammad, they simply refused to let them in the town.
Rejecting Muhammad's supplication and letting them town, were never "act of war", but apparently Muhammad must have felt resentment or anger for the townspeople of Ta'if, because 8 years later (630), he would attack the city, laying in under siege.
The people of Ta'if didn't persecute Muslims, and they didn't kill any Muslim, they just didn't let them in their city.
Ta'if didn't start a war with Muhammad, Muhammad did in 630, when the city was under siege. It was act of revenge for Ta'if not giving them refuge.
When Ta'if surrendered, Muhammad refused to let them keep their pagan religion. So Muhammad broken his own rule of "no compulsion in Islam". The townspeople of Ta'if were forced to give up their old religion.
J2hapydna, I don't think you comparing the people of Ta'if to the Nazi, "justifiable".
It was Muhammad who started the war with Ta'if in 630, not the Ta'if back in 622.
THIRD. Muhammad was now living in Medina in their new home, with his followers. Muhammad could have out the rest of his life in peace, because the persecution from pagan Meccans had stopped.
In a very short time, Muhammad was gaining a lot more followers than he did in Mecca, and with the growing number of Medina converts, came political power. The constitution of Medina hammered out by Muhammad, gave him far more power and protection, that benefited Muslims than the non-Muslims.
With that power, come with it responsibility, and Muhammad had abused his power.
What was one of the things he did with his new (political) power?
Muhammad started the raids on merchant caravans, from 623 to 624. There were at least a dozen raids on these caravans, before the battle of Badr in 624.
The caravans were not military. The merchants were civilians, who may or may not have guards to protect the merchants and the goods.
It is these raids that triggered the war between Muslims and Mecca; not Muhammad's preaching and not persecution and exile.
No, J2hapydna. This "repeated raids" was the act of war, started by Muhammad and his Muslim raiders.
Muhammad could have lived in Medina without war, but he didn't.
On all three occasions - the preaching that led to persecution in Mecca, the siege that led to the Ta'if being forcibly converted to Islam, and the raids that resulted in war with Mecca - were all situations started by Muhammad.
Each one were avoidable, but Muhammad initiated all 3 actions that caused conflicts, the first led to the last, as act of revenge.
And revenge is often act of violence and act of aggression.
And the act of war, only started:
- when there are declaration of war from one side or the other, or from both parties,
- or when one or both sides there are armed conflicts, like raid or surprise attack.
Ta'if, for instance, wasn't at war with Muslims, but Muhammad apparently took offence to not being allow refuge in their city. The act of war occurred only when Muhammad's surrounded their city. Ta'if didn't know that Muslims will take their revenge.
The whole idea that Muhammad only fight defensive war, started by others, is based on propaganda and apologetic excuses. My 2nd (with Ta'if) and 3rd (with Mecca, e.g. raids on caravans) clearly showed that Muhammad started the wars.
I love you all ^-^ 
